How Not to Fall for Bad Statistics – with Jennifer Rogers
Living is a risky business. If you believe the headlines, bacon is as deadly as smoking and fizzy drinks make children violent, but is that true? Subscribe for …
"Googling" for information tangential to "BBC" does not correlate to statistical enlightenment.
I scrolled through the comments a bit and maybe I missed something at the end. Didn't you say you would explain the hand shaking from the beginning at the end? I'm from Texas so forgive me if I missed it.
Excellent stuff. If we could get 50% of people doing this 75% of the time, Daily Mail circulation figures would plummet.
52% of 52 people agreed to the twice daily thing!
Having 1 extra person out of 400 dying of pancreatic cancer just because they chose to eat bacon doesn't seem like much, but if you consider the EU population of 500 million citizens, it means losing an extra 1.25 million people a year because of poor dietary choices. Again, it is easy to manipulate numbers if you don't look at the big picture. Please eat more fruits and vegetables, nuts and pulses, for your own sake.
I'm sorry…….. but I can't stand her voice… she reminds me of my teenager classmates back in school.
Cycling versus driving – define “danger”. Of injury? Of death? Of injury or death to others?
Uh .., she made a huge stat error in the bacon part. I stopped watching.
im gonna recommend this to the stats unit i tutor
8:15 did they really worked with people who eat bacon every day? Actually, how do you measure that? Say you have subjects who eat bacon every day, do they follow up with their lives until their deaths and count how many people developed cancer? Obviously not. Whatever the methodology in the research is, is it fair to interpret the results as prof Rogers did? I don't know, I would just really like to see it addressed more closely.
Great content, great presenter!
52% of 52 people = 27.04. How on earth can you have 0.04 of a person? Also 74% of 54 men = 39.96 men. Why are you not even questioning the very basis of these numbers?
I saw someone use a list of dog bite fatalities in the US. The problem was that they did not show the proportion of dog ownership by species – so it may have turned out that the 'most dangerous dogs' were simply the most popular dogs. I also think that getting that second dice roll because the first one did not match your hypothesis is well dodgy and you really should have been prepared for this and have had an explanation ready.
Another factor is the number of surveys thrown away – if I throw away every survey that doesn't fit my message the stats aren't valid.
When she touched on W.H.O. data, she was standing at the edge of an abyss of bad statistics and selective data use. She could have run the rest of the talk just digging into what's wrong with it. Like counting the bacon, but not the bread it's sandwiched between.
MCAS is what happened in 2018 with the Boeing 737 MAX (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System), and has to do directly with the in flight trim system and was a software glitch that sadly cost hundreds of human lives but was traceable to human error, but I digress.
Also got to say this is to date my favorite Royal Institute video she did an awesome job and communicated something very important and relevant
Am I really going to be the first person to say that 87.9% of Statistics are made up on the spot?😎
Statistically 78,3% of people will believe anything if you add statistics to it
One of my undergrad degrees was in Psychology, which, as 0% of people expect, was about 50% statistics. We learned all about the infinitesimal number of ways stats can be influenced and presented poorly to unfairly favour an outcome, and I also thoroughly learned how HARD stats is. Super super respect to the people who actually do this stuff full time and enjoy the brain-melting theoretical math behind it! You're doing incredibly noble work to fight misinformation too
Channels with videos interrupted by adverts have fewer views. Correlation = causation!
Oh sweetheart, your voice is like nails on a chalkboard.
excellent delivery . impressive ad lib when probability/dice experiment temporarily stalled. 1: junk publications publish junk . 2: mobile sleepers should avoid using loose sheets. 3: don't let Wall St take over safety critical businesses, such as airlines (Boeing. 2 crashes, 346 deaths in 2018).
Stats is written to favour the client
36:25 To be precise, whether the null hypothesis is within the confidence interval is a different thing than whether the outcome is statistically significant.
I had just finished eating cheese right before she started the "spurious statistics". I was brushing my teeth during that segment and now I'm going to bed. Wish me me luck!!!!!!!
My take away from this is … Ben & Jerry need to make bacon flavored ice cream !
Airlines assign seats by computer to load balance and optimize lift and fuel economy.
Just to be pedantic, you spelt disagree wrong in the presentation.
I ride a motorcycle every day, work with chemicals for a living, and skydive for fun. Your statistics can suck it. 🙂
advertisers are selling a dream, illusion is King and your deflationary
"Googling" for information tangential to "BBC" does not correlate to statistical enlightenment.
I scrolled through the comments a bit and maybe I missed something at the end. Didn't you say you would explain the hand shaking from the beginning at the end? I'm from Texas so forgive me if I missed it.
Excellent stuff.
If we could get 50% of people doing this 75% of the time, Daily Mail circulation figures would plummet.
52% of 52 people agreed to the twice daily thing!
Having 1 extra person out of 400 dying of pancreatic cancer just because they chose to eat bacon doesn't seem like much, but if you consider the EU population of 500 million citizens, it means losing an extra 1.25 million people a year because of poor dietary choices. Again, it is easy to manipulate numbers if you don't look at the big picture. Please eat more fruits and vegetables, nuts and pulses, for your own sake.
I'm sorry…….. but I can't stand her voice… she reminds me of my teenager classmates back in school.
Cycling versus driving – define “danger”. Of injury? Of death? Of injury or death to others?
Uh .., she made a huge stat error in the bacon part. I stopped watching.
im gonna recommend this to the stats unit i tutor
8:15 did they really worked with people who eat bacon every day? Actually, how do you measure that? Say you have subjects who eat bacon every day, do they follow up with their lives until their deaths and count how many people developed cancer? Obviously not. Whatever the methodology in the research is, is it fair to interpret the results as prof Rogers did? I don't know, I would just really like to see it addressed more closely.
Great content, great presenter!
52% of 52 people = 27.04.
How on earth can you have 0.04 of a person?
Also 74% of 54 men = 39.96 men.
Why are you not even questioning the very basis of these numbers?
I saw someone use a list of dog bite fatalities in the US.
The problem was that they did not show the proportion of dog ownership by species – so it may have turned out that the 'most dangerous dogs' were simply the most popular dogs.
I also think that getting that second dice roll because the first one did not match your hypothesis is well dodgy and you really should have been prepared for this and have had an explanation ready.
Another factor is the number of surveys thrown away – if I throw away every survey that doesn't fit my message the stats aren't valid.
When she touched on W.H.O. data, she was standing at the edge of an abyss of bad statistics and selective data use. She could have run the rest of the talk just digging into what's wrong with it. Like counting the bacon, but not the bread it's sandwiched between.
MCAS is what happened in 2018 with the Boeing 737 MAX (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System), and has to do directly with the in flight trim system and was a software glitch that sadly cost hundreds of human lives but was traceable to human error, but I digress.
Also got to say this is to date my favorite Royal Institute video she did an awesome job and communicated something very important and relevant
Am I really going to be the first person to say that 87.9% of Statistics are made up on the spot?😎
Statistically 78,3% of people will believe anything if you add statistics to it
One of my undergrad degrees was in Psychology, which, as 0% of people expect, was about 50% statistics. We learned all about the infinitesimal number of ways stats can be influenced and presented poorly to unfairly favour an outcome, and I also thoroughly learned how HARD stats is. Super super respect to the people who actually do this stuff full time and enjoy the brain-melting theoretical math behind it! You're doing incredibly noble work to fight misinformation too
Channels with videos interrupted by adverts have fewer views. Correlation = causation!
Oh sweetheart, your voice is like nails on a chalkboard.
excellent delivery . impressive ad lib when probability/dice experiment temporarily stalled. 1: junk publications publish junk . 2: mobile sleepers should avoid using loose sheets. 3: don't let Wall St take over safety critical businesses, such as airlines (Boeing. 2 crashes, 346 deaths in 2018).
Stats is written to favour the client
36:25 To be precise, whether the null hypothesis is within the confidence interval is a different thing than whether the outcome is statistically significant.
I had just finished eating cheese right before she started the "spurious statistics". I was brushing my teeth during that segment and now I'm going to bed. Wish me me luck!!!!!!!
My take away from this is … Ben & Jerry need to make bacon flavored ice cream !
Airlines assign seats by computer to load balance and optimize lift and fuel economy.
Just to be pedantic, you spelt disagree wrong in the presentation.
I ride a motorcycle every day, work with chemicals for a living, and skydive for fun. Your statistics can suck it. 🙂
advertisers are selling a dream, illusion is King and your deflationary